About your Search

20121222
20121230
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18 (some duplicates have been removed)
the deficit and really end our national debt. potentially, a significant blow to the obamacare controversial o contraceptive mandate. the eighth circuit court of appeals in the preliminary injunction to stop the mandate for being enforced against the missouri catholic businesswne owners.the li the list of statesst o now, refg to set up state-run health care exchanges for insurance. it is growing. arizona becomes the latest to telling federal government but it will have to assume the burden of operating the exchange and the cost and the supervision, perhaps even running backstage, bringing the total number of states refusing to set up an exchange under obamacare to 17 states. ten other states remainm undecided as to the course they will take or it will be state, the way, the 17 states havenow e republican governors.ppellate we are joined now by peter johnson. it's great to see you. >> thank you for having me, louu dobbs. lou: what is your reaction totie that injunction against the contraceptive mandate? >> it is a surprisingri, injunction. they lost below mr. pringle bryant and his company.y th
the groundwork for further work on both growth and deficit reduction. that's an achievable goal. that can get done in ten days. >> wow. ten days. so, will the fiscal cliff solve in ten days? i know there's a deal out there some place it may not be until january, but let's ask our free market friday panel what they think. we have the columnist for the hill and former dnc communications director katie pavlitz. and mr. greenhaus is going to stay with us. all right, katie. first of all, obama basically said in ten days we can get a deal, it sounds like a small deal, 250,000 is the middle class threshold after mr. boehner's plan "b" got defeated. is such a thing possible? or will we have to wait until the new year? >> we're probably going to have to wait until the new year, unless, of course, president obama comes back with this new plan -- the original plan that he had, which as you mentioned the $250,000 threshold. the fact is that boehner and obama's proposals really aren't that far apart right now. president obama wants $1 trillion in new taxes, john boehner has said he's willing to give $1 tr
getting close to some sort of a deal, a deal that would have dealt with deficit reduction as well as tax reform, but that all fell apart and now there's a big question mark about how they move forward and the president himself acknowledging when he addressed the nation on friday that given the tight timeframe, hopes for a larger deal have all, but faded and he's calling on congress to work together to just get a deal that would have at the very least extend lower tax rates for those making $250,000 or less and also to extend unemployment insurance and to help lay the groundwork for deficit reduction in the future. right now the expectations have been lowered a great deal in terms of what is actually possible and you heard the president say that he is still optimistic that something can get done before the january 1st deadline and of course, there's a lot of pressure for these lawmakers to get something done because if they don't the economy could go back into a recession eventa you willy. >> kristen well wiker with the president in hawaii. >>> joining me now from his home district in ver
the ground work for future progress on more economic growth and deficit reduction. >> republicans say they want a deal as well, but they highlighted their biggest sticking points today in their weekly address. listen now to missouri senator roy blount. >> senate democrats have spent months drawing partisan lines in the sand. the president's proposal to raise tax on the top 2% of americans won't even pay one-third of the annual interest that's now owed on this massive $16 trillion debt. in fact, the president's tax hike would only fund the government for eight days. >> the senate is set to reconvene sunday at 1:00 eastern time. the house expected to be in session sunday. are going to start around 2:00 with the first votes coming around 6:30 p.m. let's head on over to the white house. kristen welker standing by. a lot happening in washington, d.c. a lot happening i would assume at the white house. but how engaged is the presidented to in moving this thing forward? >> reporter: good afternoon, t.j. i am told there are conversations going on at the staff level. as you know, he met with co
change in order to deal with the deficit. but remember, the president has his pressure points, too. you have members on the left in the house, progressives that believe, you know, medicare should not be touched, social security should not be touched. so the president -- you know, and he's got to deal with that part of his base who came out and made him a two-term president. >> so, david drucker, then, do you think the gop, that they want to go over the fiscal cliff because then when they come back in january and there's any talk about changing things up, it's going to be to reduce the taxes? they can go on record, well, we reduced taxes. is there any reason for the president and congress to come back to work in washington the day after christmas? >> you know, well, they have to try or they have to at least show that they're trying. i think that both democrats and republicans in congress agree on at least one thing, and that's that a bad deal is better than no deal. of course both sides have different versions of what a bad deal would mean. some republicans think let's go over the cliff
it because it's required for congress to authorize borrowing money to pay our debt and deficit obligations. it's, the way i look at it, it is a mere constitutional technicality and we should raise it. i would like to make one point about on the downgrade issue that he just talked about. if we go over the fiscal cliff, that would certainly be no reason for a downgrade because we would be cutting the deficit and the debt. lori: right. >> but if we kick the can down the road here and don't do anything with a short-term solution, then i think it would be reasonable for the debt, excuse me for --. lori: another downgrade. >> for us to be downgraded, excuse me. lori: let me send it back over to you. there is a line of thinking if we do suffer a second credit downgrade that it could actually have more of ramification than just one downgrade because you do have a handful of credit agencies, right? if you're creditor of the united states and looking at the credit rating and now you have not just one but two, so you have a majority of more negative credit ratings versus pristine credit rating across
for every bill they passed that would add to the deficit. and then they had to exempt themselves from their own rule for the very first bill they introduced when the war on women thing really picked up pace and the republicans' incessant focus on abortion stuff started to hurt the party politically. you remember john boehner insisting over and over again that this anti-abortion stuff was a democratic conspiracy. republicans were not focused on war on women at all, jobs, jobs, jobs. the furthest thing was the anti-abortion legislation. they weren't even working on that. all the while he was making that case, his own republicans kept introducing more and more and more and more anti-abortion legislation. forget what john boehner says. he doesn't speak for us. since john boehner has been speaker, since early 2011, the house has had real trouble just doing basic run of the mill governing stuff. bills failing unexpectedly and needing to be pulled at the last minute and tried again. the republican leadership's own legislation failing to get enough republican votes to pass. and that happening
on more economic growth and deficit reduction. you guys, i can hear you over there. i believe such a proposal could pass both houses with bipartisan majorities. as long as those leaders allow it, to actually come to a vote. if members of the house or the senate want to vote no, they can, but we should let everybody vote. >> i would actually really like to know who he was shushing there. but to his main point, here's what the president intends to do. senators reid and mcconnell will try to come to a deal. if they fail, the white house and harry reid are going to try to jam through a bill that increases taxes on rich people and extends unemployment insurance, which are the two key democratic priorities. they'll pretty much dare republicans to block it. and republicans probably won't be able to, at least not for long. here's johnny isaacson, a republican senator from georgia, over the weekend. >> if we get down to the end of this year, and the only choice we have is to save taxes going up on the middle class, then i would support that. >> last weekend, "the wall street journal" h
need to do, we can run a 2% deficit. we need to get back to "x" amount of revenue, and "y" amount of government spending. and most people say somewhere between like 18 revenue, 20 spending, maybe 19 revenue, 21 pending. given what the democrats and the white house are offering on the spending cuts, do you feel that maybe they're thinking they want to keep it at 23, 22, 24? we're not seeing anything that gets us anywhere near 20 or 21 in terms of the offers we're seeing from them. are we? >> no. no. i mean, this would be like, you know, in 1969, we landed the first man on the moon. but it would have never happened if -- the only thing they worried about was exactly how the, you know, the lunar module was going to land, but not how they were going to leave the atmosphere of the earth. you can't worry about the little details on these tax issues. as much as the winners of the election want to punish the rich, because i can't think of any other reason that we dwell so much on that side of it, the rest of it, what did i read? senator corker was telling me before we went on air, and i w
i've been working with leaders of both parties on a proposal to get our deficit under control. avoid tax hikes on the middle class, and to make sure we can spur jobs and economic growth. >> how we get there, god only knows. >> will an agreement bring positive change to the economy? former economic advisor to president reagan, art laffer is here. >> how is everything going? >> going we will on this end. not washington but on this end. there's recap for a second, if you will. the laffer curve that you game famous for. that's your theory on tax rates and revenue and it shows, the laffer curve, if you have a tax rate of zero obviously you correct zero revenue to run the government. if you have a tax rate, your theory holds of 100%, you also probably collect zero in revenue because you've disincentivized people to get to work. somewhere in your curve is the sweet spot of the tax rate that would allow for the most revenue. what is that sweet spot? >> i don't know where it is exactly, obviously. but i know the laffer curve, the operation in the upper income groups is much more sensitive to
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)